Does anyone pay attention to the schedules that are released for each sport and wonder why there are D2, D3, and NAIA schools on the schedule. That is to gauge where our teams are in talent and to determine where our best fit is. With NIL and Revenue sharing the University must and will make cuts. The only way around that is drop in divisions. Mcbroom knows what it takes to compete in D2. The decision to cut the sports that were cut is to try to stay in the D1 classification. The title 9 lawsuit will only expedite the move down.

Jackdad22 said:

---

Does anyone pay attention to the schedules that are released for each sport and wonder why there are D2, D3, and NAIA schools on the schedule. That is to gauge where our teams are in talent and to determine where our best fit is. With NIL and Revenue sharing the University must and will make cuts. The only way around that is drop in divisions. Mcbroom knows what it takes to compete in D2. The decision to cut the sports that were cut is to try to stay in the D1 classification. The title 9 lawsuit will only expedite the move down.

---

Every FCS school(almost) has to schedule at least 1 or 2 sub D1 school every year. It's because scheduling FCS games out of conference is difficult since almost all FCS schools also play 1 or 2 FBS game a year.

For anyone saying football should be dropped, keep in mind football is probably the closest of all our sports to break even in the budget just because of the shear scale of football games and the massive payouts we get from our money games. Football and basketball are likely never going to be in danger of being dropped unless SFA gets into a situation where the school is in the verge of closing.

SCH890 said:

---

Jackdad22 said:

---

Behind closed doors, division 2 is being discussed. Then you won't have to fight the lawsuits.

---

God I hope not. That would be the worst move yet. Honestly cutting men's baseball I would be fine with. The program has not lived up to standards. Plus then we don't to build a stadium near campus. Saves that money.

---

This is really the only of the remaining sports that would make any kind of sense to cut.

As far as SFA moving to D2, again like cutting football, I feel SFA would only do so if the absolute fate of the university depended on it. If SFA ever even considered moving down, I'd say we would be looking at the last few years of Stephen F. Austin State University.

Jackdad22 said:

---

Behind closed doors, division 2 is being discussed. Then you won't have to fight the lawsuits.

---

Is this from any credible source, or is this just your assumption?

SFASawmillGuy said:

---

Jackdad22 said:

---

Behind closed doors, division 2 is being discussed. Then you won't have to fight the lawsuits.

---

Is this from any credible source, or is this just your assumption?

---

I don't believe for a nanosecond that that discussion's happening!

And anyone who even suggests dropping football needs to either get their head examined or move to Prison Tech country!

How could SFA cut any other men's sport if we are already at the minimum required by the NCAA for D1? Seems to me the only solution is to add more women's sports or drop down to D2. D2 only requires 4 men's sports if you have 6 or more women's sports.

I also don't understand why cheer wouldn't be included as a sport. From what I have read, Title IX does not say anything about whether it is acknowledged by the NCAA as a sport or not. Title IX applies to any school receiving federal funds, not just D1 NCAA sports. Even if we dropped to D2, there would have to be a significant redistribution of scholarships to comply with Title IX.

By dropping to D2 the number of scholarships would be dropped dramatically. 36 football scholarships 10 Basketball scholarships 9 Baseball scholarships. The nil and Revenue Sharing basically goes away. Mcbroom on multiple occasions said that SFA would only invest in student athletes that would GRADUATE from SFA . The Athletes that are here for the money should sign an agreement with the university so if they leave early they reimburse any financial aid received from the school and vice versa should the school back out on their obligations.

MasterAxe2 said:

---

That article states we've been out of compliance for 20+ years.

Systemic stupidity.

---

This applies to every member of the SLC. There are almost zero FCS schools that comply with Title XI requirements completely, because of the weight of football scholarships.

The logical move would have been to drop baseball. Show progress towards meeting Title IX requirements. The courts go away. Period.

I'm just really confused. If we meet the Title XI requirements (which appears that we are with the cuts) and we are honoring the existing scholarships, then why the lawsuit? I am a girl dad and had a daughter go to another school on a "dance team" scholarship. If her scholarship had been cut then we would have sought out other opportunities. Go where the opportunity is. If it's not SFA, then go. I am sure I will get ridiculed with this statement but oh well!

Go back and read the court transcripts....SFA is not in compliance and the cuts were mostly women's sports making the ratio worse. The young women had every right to bring the action.
Perhaps they love being at SFA, maybe they feel betrayed by the promise of learning here and competing here in their sport only to be cut off at the knees.
SFA leadership made this blunder, don't try and turn it on the victims. The "Good ol boy" days are gone or at least should be. And if those in control of athletics and compliance can't do their jobs properly then they need to be removed.
Remember all the wins and scholarships we had to forfeit due to SFA folks not doing their jobs correctly regarding eligibility awhile back, seems to be an ongoing problem getting the right people in place.
Perhaps this is where the UT system could step in and get SFA up to speed on following directives.

If it is as simple as Broom just didn't give a crap and cut the sports without consideration of Title IX then he should be fired immediately. I just can't wrap my head around the idea that they didn't look at this from EVERY angle so as not to get a black eye!!!! UT doesn't want this either and I assume it comes back on them for allowing it to happen if it doesn't comply with Title IX.. I don't think Broom is the final decision maker.

Maybe UT just thinks that with their deep pockets, they can fight until it goes away! Hard to image this scenario either.

I'll say it again. Closing the baseball program and one of the women's sports (BVB?) and none of this would have transpired. We would be at least making an effort to get into compliance.

The positive side of this is, how much longer will scholarships/ equivalents / etc even matter. With the market we are in.

ULM's AD just resigned as the president asked for "reported" $6-$9 million dollars in cuts from a FBS budget that is in the $20 million range.

Look, none of this matters.

We're all gonna forget about this when Carthel goes for it on 4th and 5 from inside our own 30 cause "it felt right."

Lots of talk on campus about dropping to D2 athletics. I don't think any of what I have heard can be traced back to the top levels, so it may all just be rumor mill fluff. I will say that SFA likes to compare itself to UT-Tyler, which is booming in enrollment and is relatively nearby.

UT-Tyler is D2. It's hard for me find reasons for SFA to stay at the D1 level post-NIL. With NIL, I don't think our men's basketball team will ever compete at the level they did previously. We can't recruit at the same level as teams that will throw $1 million to backup players. And if SFA lands a diamond in the rough, they'll transfer after one season to another university that will pay them.

Well if ultimately we go to D2, which seems unthinkable to me, then I think it will be the final statement on the WAC gamble. Sam used that as a stepping stone to quickly solidify their stature in the mid level of D1, and now we're (hypothetically) floundering on the edge of holding on to the Southland and the bottom of D1.

I don't have much bad to say about Ivey or McBroom, but this hasn't been a great offseason for their reputations or our athletics standing. I sure hope in a few short weeks the reality of how our sports teams execute makes us forget about these missteps.

nacluth said:

---

Well if ultimately we go to D2, which seems unthinkable to me, then I think it will be the final statement on the WAC gamble. Sam used that as a stepping stone to quickly solidify their stature in the mid level of D1, and now we're (hypothetically) floundering on the edge of holding on to the Southland and the bottom of D1.

I don't have much bad to say about Ivey or McBroom, but this hasn't been a great offseason for their reputations or our athletics standing. I sure hope in a few short weeks the reality of how our sports teams execute makes us forget about these missteps.

---

I think it will be figured out. It seems to me that our MBB / WBB / WVB programs are all D1 programs that have some heft. I disagree with the notion raised earlier, that our MBB will never be competitive again.

Will we get to the sweet 16? Nah. Can we be competitive and knock off some B12 teams ? Yes. It will be harder.

The P4 is separating themselves from the rest D1 on the football front. Conferences will begin setting rules that allow more flexibility in how sports are aligned. They have to.

When I say this , I am speaking for the vast majority of FCS schools (95%). They all need to consider the sports they sponsor. NIL is changing things so fast athletics departments won't look the same in a few years.